It's different when we do it

No, they all lack the course to stand up to the establishment Democrat bullies

*Courage. Stupid autocorrect lol

Nice black or white fallacy.

"if the color isn't red, it's green. If it's not green, it's red"

lol many Antifa are clearly anarchists. And they're not remotely anti fascist.

Once again, that's a retarded take based off the false premise that they are anti fascist merely because of their name. Everyone that doesn't want anarchy isn't a fascist. Or is Biden a fascist?

I don't know.....those MAGAs that stormed the capitol seems anti-government. Kinda Anarchyish.

Antifa is by definition Anti-Fascist. So, if these people you claim are "not remotely anti-fascist" then they can't be "Antifa." I mean....it's in the name. Like if there was a group called PROGAY and you claim some gay bashers in a group are "PROGAY." It's just....no. No they aren't.

I never said everyone that doesn't want anarchy is a fascist. I said that must be the logical endpoint to Norsegreen's statements. So again, if my logic is wrong then Norsegreen's is as well.

Ahhh, so those antifa/blm's that burned, looted, tore down statues, attacked cops, burned US flags, called for the abolishment of the police for 9 months... they'd be kinda anti government and anarchyish too?

Why do you put so much stock in a name? So if I started a group called PROGAY and filled it with people that hated gays, they wouldn't be anti gay?

I don't even dispute it was originally brought back with that intention, perhaps, but as they've gained power, they've become fascistic, at least in the way they see it.

All she said was he was an anarchist. You made the claim that being an 'anti fascist' meant one couldn't also be considered an anarchist. Sounds like a circular argument fallacy as well.

I didn’t make the fallacy. I simply stated a supported analogy.

No you didn't make the rules, you just play by the rules someone else designed for you to play by.

No, he didn't say it, SHE said it. For someone who pretends to know a lot, you sure are lax about educating yourself.

I didn’t know and don’t care. She. Whatever.

Anarchists love violence and disruption, whatever label these things take. And I have know doubt you already know this. Fascism always breeds in the fetid pool of anarchy.

Not true. Some anarchists are quite violent. *Many* are peaceful. In general using notions of group membership with logical inference is a way of making weak arguments. The problem is that when we make claims about the linking of social groups by way of identity politics (the "strange bedfellows" of the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thing) we get into hazy territory with defining groups by their least favorable factors. The solution is statistics. When I say Nazis were Christian in 1939, I can assign a percentage to it because there was a census taken that asked that question. The number was 97.5%. My *updated) source is in one of my 2 posts in the comment section.

Lol how’s that work? Fascism is literally the opposite of anarchy. You said it yourself. Since you say fascism ALWAYS breeds in the fetid pool of anarchy, it shouldn’t be too hard to give some examples.

Its actually the opposite. Fascism acts as an ally to anarchism, until the anarchists can't decide what to do, then Fascism threatens to kill the anarchists if they don't join them and the anarchists become Fascists or die.

OK again, if this is the norm, providing some examples would be easy, right? So go ahead and do that.

Also don't use Italy. That's an awful example.